port_cutleaves

[nox]

Why is that overkill? I thought the ultimate goal of MacPorts was  
binary packages. Binary packages won't need the *proto packages. I  
think we should not move these to lib deps.

Le 19 juin 09 à 19:44, Jeremy Huddleston a écrit :

> They *were* build deps, but they were moved into lib deps.  This is  
> because too many ports need them to build, and adding build deps for  
> all those X11 protocol headers in each port that needs them was  
> overkill.
>
>
> On Jun 19, 2009, at 08:14, Thomas De Contes wrote:
>
>>
>> Le 19 juin 09 à 03:40, Perry Lee a écrit :
>>
>>> On Jun 19, 2009, at 9:34 AM, Thomas De Contes wrote:
>>>> thanks to port_cutleaves, i uninstalled all ports that i didn't  
>>>> need :-)
>>>>
>>>> and today, doing "port -u upgrade outdated", it reinstalls them :-/
>>>>
>>>> xorg-xtrans
>>>> xorg-bigreqsproto
>>>> xorg-xcmiscproto
>>>> xorg-xextproto
>>>> xorg-xf86bigfontproto
>>>> xorg-inputproto
>>>> xorg-kbproto
>>>> gperf
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> port_cutleaves still find them as "leaves"
>>>
>>> I'd guess those are build dependencies rather than library  
>>> dependencies.
>>
>> ok,
>> so why uninstall them, since i'll need it later ?
>>
>> -- 
>> Téléassistance / Télémaintenance
>> http://www.portparallele.com/ThomasDECONTES/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> macports-users mailing list
>> macports-users at lists.macosforge.org
>> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> macports-users mailing list
> macports-users at lists.macosforge.org
> http://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/macports-users